JTA Skyway Riverside Extension

[Captain Zissou]

I think a Riverside leg will double ridership.  Thanks to the development of the Strand, Peninsula, San Marco Place, the system now makes sense for a few people to use it to go to and from downtown.  I have a friend who uses it whenever possible, but it's still faster for him to walk from the Peninsula to the Landing.

[exnewsman]

II have a friend who uses it whenever possible, but it's still faster for him to walk from the Peninsula to the Landing.

How is that possible? I don't think there's anyway one could walk from the Peninsula to the LAnding faster that the Skyway can take him there - especially considering you have Skyway Station basically across the street.  I'll take the air conditioned elevated train ride with a great view over walking in the heat anyday.

[Captain Zissou]

Not right now. You have to use the Kings Ave Station due to the Fire at the station closest to those condos.  The skyway dumps you 3 blocks from the Landing anyway.  For Hemming Plaza, the Skyway can't be beat.  I'm sure if there was ever programming at the Prime Osborn that interested me, it would be ideal for this too.  Half the fun of Artwalk every month is the skyway trip to and from (IMO).

[stjr]

You state that the projections that the consultants came up with for the Skyway were inaccurate however, those numbers were based on a larger, built-out system.  The current Skyway does not reflect this system.

Sorry, not so, Cline.  The projections I am referring to were for what is built NOW.  I don't understand why proponents keep saying it was for a larger system.  I have posted the info before on MJ $ky-high-way threads.  This is what I mean when I say proponents like to rewrite the $ky-high-way's history.  Relying on inaccurate info just undermines further the credibility of $ky-high-way "pro" positions.

P.S. I think its safe to say that all three "people mover" systems built  (Jax, Miami, and Detroit) have failed to live up to the projections made for them when built.  That, alone, would be a 100% failure rate by their transit consultants.  I don't have time at the moment, but I don't think I will need to look far to find other transit projects that failed to generate the traffic projected.  Likewise, I am sure there will be some that exceeded expectations, but I am suggesting they will be outnumbered  by those that didn't.

[scaleybark]

You can't make the skyway ground level. Monorails have to be grade-separated because they have a big concrete "rail" that can't be crossed by cars or even pedestrians. Go ride the skyway and take a look out the windows. You'll quickly see why it can't be done.

Perhaps ground level will not work, but placing it about 10 feet above ground level should be cheaper than having it 50 feet in the air.  This should also enable the skyway to pass underneath freeway bridges.

[Captain Zissou]

10 feet?? Should we just divert all UPS/ FEDEX/ Trash/ Food/ Fire/ and construction vehicles around downtown?  I think the height it's at will have to be where it stays.
I think the majority of the cost isn't in the height of the support columns, but the degree to which the track is overbuilt.  A more streamlined track would do wonders to reduce cost. 
I didn't realize this until a couple weeks ago, but the height of the track increases significantly to go over the I-95 to Main Street Bridge approach.  This section of road is lower than most raised roadways around downtown, but I thought this was interesting to see.

[Joe]

^ I think the bottom of the infrastructure needs to be at minimum 14 feet tall when crossing over a road. Might even be taller than that. It's going to depend on the state of Florida. Jax has no say in the matter.

[Captain Zissou]

I figured that was the case, I just didn't know the minimum height.  The skyway most likely wouldn't be able to go over any other raised road sections in the area, but i just thought that this section and the section where it goes under the Acosta bridge ramps set a precedent for future situations when adjusting track heights will be necessary.

[thelakelander]

This situation is like purchasing the most expensive fishing rod in the store and then being too cheap to get bait to make a catch. Sort of like buying a yacht, but refusing to gas it up.

The river crossing, automated operations center and changing the transit technology are the Skyway's largest expenses.  Extending lines a few hundred feet to a mile won't cost nearly as much as the original expense.  However, until the system is streamlined and integrated into the rest of the city's transportation network, it will fail to attract decent ridership.

[Ocklawaha]

BINGO lakelander

Ocklawaha

[Jason]

Here are some numbers I've dug up on the Skyway's costs as compared to other transit systems.

Here are some numbers for you..



The following capital and construction cost data in Table 1 have been drawn from such sources. For consistency, all data have been escalated to year 2002 dollars using CPI data from the US Department of Commerce, thus enabling a fair comparison of per-mile costs for systems built in widely different years.


Table 1.
Urban Monorails:
System Installation Cost
Cost per Mile ($ Millions, 2002)

Chiba (Japan): Monorail (extension)



128.2



Jacksonville: Skyway (new)



81.1



Kitakyushu (Japan): Monorail (new)



205.9



Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) (new)



58.2



Las Vegas (LVMC Project, new)



166.7



Newark: Monorail AGT (new)



223.1



Okinawa (Japan): Monorail (new)



103.9



Average



138.2








[Sources: Capital Metro, Rapid Transit Project, ADraft B Milestone 2 Executive Summary: Urban Transit Vehicles@, 1 October 2001; Steve Arrington, Jacksonville Transportation Authority, 12 October 2001; Leroy Demery, Jr., May 2002; Monorail Malaysia, news release, 23 April 2001; Jacob Snow, AThe Las Vegas Monorail@, Monorail Society website, 2002/11/02. Calculations by LRP]
Capital costs of recent LRT projects, again, drawn from actual project experiences, are listed in Table 2.



Table 2.
Light Rail Transit (LRT)
System Installation Cost
Cost per Mile ($ Millions, 2002)

Surface - Minimum Civil Works
Baltimore: Central Line Phase 1 (new)



20.0



Baltimore: Central Line/3 (ext.)



17.4



Denver: RTD Central (new)



25.9



Denver: RTD Southwest (ext.)



21.5



Portland: MAX Eastside line (new)



28.3



Sacramento: RTD starter line (new)



13.1



Sacramento: RTD Mather (ext.)



16.4



Saint Louis MetroLink SW Illinois (ext.)



19.4



Salt Lake City: UTA starter line (new)



22.8



San Diego: Trolley Blue Line (ext.)



33.2



San Diego: Trolley Orange Line (ext.)



24.9



San Jose: VTA Guadalupe corridor (new)



27.8



San Jose: VTA Tasman corridor (ext.)



46.5



Average



24.4








Extensive Civil Works

Dallas: DART S & W Oak Cliff



33.2



Dallas: DART - North to Park Ln



62.2



Los Angeles: MTA Blue Line



46.1



Los Angeles: MTA Green Line



52.1



Portland: MAX Westside line



60.2



St. Louis: Metrolink (new start)



37.2



Average



48.5








[Sources: Capital Metro Rapid Transit Project, ADraft B Milestone 2 Executive Summary: Urban Transit Vehicles@, 1 October 2001; converted to 2002 dollars by LRP]

Source: http://www.lightrailnow.org/myths/m_monorail001.htm

[Jason]

Cost information from the Library of Congress dated 1997:

Jacksonville automated skyway express extension project.--The Committee recommends $15,300,000 to complete the Jacksonville automated skyway express. The Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA) is developing a 0.3 mile extension of the automated skyway express south of downtown Jacksonville, and completion of a maintenance facility. The extension consists of an elevated, double track guideway running from the San Marco to Flagler Station segment, now under construction, through the South Bank business district to the Dupont Station. The final segment totals $25,000,000 for which Congress has appropriated $9,500,000. It is the Committee's understanding that the JTA has contributed $25,000,000 to the Florida Department of Transportation exclusively for the reconstruction of the Fuller Warren Bridge as a condition funding for the Jacksonville ASE.

Source: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp104&sid=cp1045EqlO&refer=&r_n=hr631.104 &item=&sel=TOC_533295&

[Jason]

Assuming the $15.3 million for 0.3 miles I would assume that a 1 mile extension would cost about $50 million. What is everyone else's take? I know they atate that part of the funds are to complete the maintence facility but is that part of the $15.3 or the total $25?

Also note that part of the 2.5 miles was a river crossing which is probably much more expensive than a land route.

[thelakelander]

$13.1 million/mile for light rail?  We need to take some notes from Sacramento!

[thelakelander]

Nice find.

The extension consists of an elevated, double track guideway running from the San Marco to Flagler Station segment, now under construction, through the South Bank business district to the Dupont Station.

I'm assuming this was the San Marco to Kings Avenue Station segment?  I may be off base, but from my understanding, this entire 0.3 mile segment cost $25 million.  This cost includes double tracking (so its really 0.6 miles) and three elevated stations, including one (San Marco) that is massive.

My guess is depending the corridor, you could significantly reduce that number.  For example, if extended to Atlantic Blvd (San Marco Square), the end could be single track and dropped to grade, once its over the FEC tracks.  While you could not drop it to grade, the Riverside extension could also be single tracked at the end point.